- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2008 00:52:49 +0100
- To: Kartikaya Gupta <lists.webapps@stakface.com>
- CC: public-webapps@w3.org
Kartikaya Gupta wrote: > On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:06:23 +0100, "Charles McCathieNevile" > <chaals@opera.com> wrote: >> [1] http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api/ [2] > > Is it just me or is the "scope element" somewhat under-defined in the > spec? The only mentions of it are in this sentence: > > "If the context node is a Document node, then the scope element is > the documentElement of the given document. If the context node is an > Element node, then the scope element is the same as the context > node." > > However, it doesn't say what the scope element does or why it's > relevant, nor does it have a reference to any other spec that > explains this. I did a quick search through the list archives (I > haven't been following it too closely) and it looks like the :scope > pseudo-class will be defined in another spec. It was added with the intention of referencing whichever spec :scope (or whatever it gets called) gets defined in, which will most likely be Selectors Level 4. The statement itself makes sense when read in the context of the :scope proposal. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2008Jul/att-0025/Overview.html But I suppose I could comment it out for now, until :scope is defined in a real spec and the statement is actually needed. > Also, since the scope element stuff was deferred to another spec, > this spec remains somewhat ambiguous (at least to me) about exactly > what gets selected in the following case: > > <html> > <body> > <div class="bar"> > <div id="foo"> > <div class="baz"></div> > </div> > </div> > </body> > </html> > > document.getElementById('foo').querySelector('.bar .baz') This is covered in the spec by the statement: "Selectors are evaluated against a given element in the context the entire DOM tree in which the element is located." > I believe the above querySelector call should return the "baz" div as > opposed to NULL, but it took me a few close readings of the spec to > decide on that. A clarifying example in the spec would be quite > helpful on this one. Yeah, I suppose it's not too late to add a small example illustrating that. I've made those changes in the current editor's draft. Though I'd rather not make too many additional changes now as I don't want to hold up publication. Any other issues like this can wait till after this Last Call draft is published and can be fixed before it goes to CR. -- Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software http://lachy.id.au/ http://www.opera.com/
Received on Friday, 31 October 2008 23:53:36 UTC